googologywikiaorg-20200223-history
User talk:Cloudy176
action=edit&section=new}} Leave a message • action=history}} History • action=purge}} Purge this page Discussions older than 3 months may be archived. My timezone is UTC+9 hours. If you post a message here, make sure to check back this page later, as my reply will usually be on this page. Mutual "Friend" Hello Cloudy176, there is something I need to talk to you about. I know I have made no edits here, but we do have a mutual "friend". If possible, I'd like to meet you in chat at 8:00 PM, SAST. Cooljoe01 (Talk) (9 Mar 2019 8:37 AM SAST) 06:37, March 9, 2019 (UTC) :That would be 3:00 AM in my local time, though. Any other suggestions? -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 13:10, March 9, 2019 (UTC) ::Alright, tell me a time that will suit you (that still keeps my time zone in mind). Cooljoe01 (Talk) (9 Mar 2019 7:50 PM SAST) 17:50, March 9, 2019 (UTC) :::Ooh, you two are going to talk about a "friend"? I wish I could meet them... I love making new friends! :D MegaR0ck3r (talk) 01:41, March 10, 2019 (UTC) ::::I am free now for another 3-5 hours. Cooljoe01 (Talk) (10 Mar 2019 7:04 PM SAST) 17:04, March 10, 2019 (UTC) Not directly related to the above messages Hmm... -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:54, March 11, 2019 (UTC) Please stop reverting my contributions It looks like you have reverted my contributions on Exponentiation. I have reverted your contributions. If you keep reverting my contributions, you might be blocked from editing anymore. 22:31, April 4, 2019 (UTC) :I re-added \(n \neq -1\) because the equation \(\int x^n dx = \frac{1}{n + 1}x^{n + 1} + C\) doesn't hold if \(n = -1\), as \(\int x^{-1} dx = \int \frac{1}{x} dx = \ln x + C\). I would have re-added it again if it wasn't already re-added in a different form. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 08:00, April 5, 2019 (UTC) Google Docs as a source XYZeed (talk) 01:23, April 18, 2019 (UTC)Hey, I have a question. Can I cite my numbers using a Google doc that is open to the public? :We allow (or allowed?) Google Sites as a source, so why not Google Docs as well? They aren't that much different. However, if you allow editing of the doc by the public, it would count as an open wiki, and I don't think that will be a reliable enough source. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:35, April 18, 2019 (UTC) apology I apologize for vandalizing your userpage. DrCocktor (talk) 14:42, April 18, 2019 (UTC) :It's fine. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:10, April 18, 2019 (UTC) XYZeed (talk) 13:02, April 19, 2019 (UTC)Okay so I made a page for my number and added a source does that mean it won’t get deleted? :According to Sbiis Saibian, the only other reason a page will get deleted is if your number is ill-defined DrCocktor (talk) 18:56, May 8, 2019 (UTC) ::I don't think being ill-defined is a valid reason to delete an article. Oblivion is still around, for example. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 03:06, May 9, 2019 (UTC) 25 what did you add to the article about 25? Ribark (talk) 10:08, April 23, 2019 (UTC) :It's just . -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:32, April 23, 2019 (UTC) ::And now with Hyper operator? Ribark (talk) 15:16, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::: . Nothing special. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:18, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::::Oh Ribark (talk) 15:20, April 29, 2019 (UTC) Myriotar and Myrintar Who added the titles "Myriotar" and "Myriotar"? If you deleted the pages I made for them because they're not in their source, then who made them if it wasn't Denis Maksudov? Ribark (talk) 12:49, April 28, 2019 (UTC) :It's someone who frequently added unsourced numbers on the mainspace and templates on this wiki. I have removed that name from the template containing Denis Maksudov's numbers, but for some reason, the what links here for and still display links. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:38, April 28, 2019 (UTC) ::Huh Ribark (talk) 10:02, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::I have an image with the two, showing that they're still around. Ribark (talk) 10:07, April 29, 2019 (UTC) Thanks for making me realise euro shouldn't be capitalized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribark (talk • ) 15:25, May 1, 2019 (UTC) :No problem. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:50, May 1, 2019 (UTC) Admin privileges Make me an admin please DrCocktor (talk) 04:43, May 5, 2019 (UTC) :No, I don't think you're ready yet. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 03:06, May 9, 2019 (UTC) �� DrCocktor (talk) 21:56, May 9, 2019 (UTC) Gender So I’m confused by your profile. R u male or female DrCocktor (talk) 23:45, May 10, 2019 (UTC) :I made that part intentionally confusing. I'm actually male. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:05, May 11, 2019 (UTC) Undo Revision Why did you undo my revision on deedlit’s userpage DrCocktor (talk) 02:58, May 16, 2019 (UTC) :While Deedlit having reducing interest in googology might be true, he might not want to write messages like that on his user page. In general, you may want to avoid edits that significantly alter the meaning of other user pages. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 17:40, May 16, 2019 (UTC) GibsonC0104 Why did you block him a second time? He was creating his numbers as blog posts not articles DrCocktor (talk) 16:02, May 17, 2019 (UTC) :The user was unsourced pages on article space. I turned them into blog posts. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:12, May 17, 2019 (UTC) New Rule-Breakers Well, well, well. Look what was just made. https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googolongplex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribark (talk • ) 15:33, May 24, 2019 (UTC) Link unavailable. Error 404 DrCocktor (talk) 01:00, May 25, 2019 (UTC) :Well, I moved the page off the mainspace, so the original link will no longer work. I should have replied sooner. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 09:25, May 25, 2019 (UTC) Another one. https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googolox I am a Googologist 10:40, June 14, 2019 (UTC) :That one's more like an old rule-breaker, as it's one of the unsourced articles created by Andre Joyce back in 2014. I will handle all of them later. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:37, June 14, 2019 (UTC) Wikis as sources to post your googologism Are we allowed to use the other wikis as sources DrCocktor (talk) 21:26, May 27, 2019 (UTC) : The rule on citation is available here. : p-adic 22:06, May 27, 2019 (UTC) Clarification of Problems Hi. Since this wiki is the largest wiki on googology, many beginners refer to it. Then they usually do not doubt that numbers or systems in articles are actually well-defined, while several stuffs contain theoretical problems. For example, BEAF is said not to be successfully defined beyond tetration level, while some believe that BEAF is stronger than that level. BIG FOOT is ill-defined, while many believe that it is a valid uncomputable number. The definitions of Little Bigeddon and Sasquatch contain undefined stuffs, while they are widely believed as the largest valid uncomputable numbers. I think that it is better for us to clarify the existence of such problems (mainly on ill-definedness) so that beginners hesitate to just believe the well-definedness of them without sufficient thoughts. What do you think abut it? If you agree with me, then I will add some descriptions on such problems. I would like you to give me your opinion. p-adic 05:25, May 28, 2019 (UTC) :Sure, if you want. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:09, May 28, 2019 (UTC) :: Thank you! :: p-adic 15:08, May 28, 2019 (UTC) Clarification of Problems, part 2 Hello, Cloudy176. I would like to ask you: which ordinal in FGH corresponds to Worm(3)? Indirect methods derive an estimate about \omega*3+1. Tetramur (talk) 15:01, May 28, 2019 (UTC) I just wanted to say thanks for sticking around and helping moderate the place. It can be kinda depressing to see others leave so finding people like you, Ynought, and others popping up in the comments really means a lot. Again, thank you. QuasarBooster (talk) 00:09, May 29, 2019 (UTC) :My determination keeps me going. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:02, May 29, 2019 (UTC) Could you please block DrCocktor? Or at least, block him from editing my talk page. It seems like he's only there to troll or leave nonsensical comments. He first left two kind of stupid question, then left fart jokes, then left a sexual orientation joke (the latter two I deleted). Cookiefonster (talk) 19:36, June 9, 2019 (UTC) I came here to do googology. I did not come here to troll this place DrCocktor (talk) 22:23, June 9, 2019 (UTC) googolnews Why did you delete my content on Googology Wiki:googolnews about sexual orientation DrCocktor (talk) 20:22, June 10, 2019 (UTC) :Because I don't think that's an event notable enough to be displayed on the main page of the wiki. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 12:58, June 11, 2019 (UTC) could you please block cookiefonster He always reverts my edits to his talk page DrCocktor (talk) 21:44, June 11, 2019 (UTC) :blah -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:29, June 13, 2019 (UTC) Unsourced Article I marked this article as a candidate of deletion with a specific explicit reason, but the mark was deleted by Ubersketch without any arguments in the corresponding talk page. I would like you to give us your opinion on this article. According to the article, the title ψ(ψᵢ(0)) is one of Rathjen's OCF, but there is no source about it. It is neither Rathjen's standard OCF or its simplified variant in Realm of Ordinal Analysis, and hence I doubt the existence. If it does not actually exists, it is not responsible for us to keep the description that the OCF is created by Rathjen. Since we are not allowed to create an article of a large number without a source, we should not create an article on an expression of an ordinal based on an OCF without a source, shouldn't we? At least, I sometimes hear other googologists to talk the false statement that Rathjen's standard OCF satisfies the property of in the article, and hence the article actually causes confusion. p-adic 06:13, June 15, 2019 (UTC) :Keep the article for now; I think that ordinal is notable enough to not require a source. Maybe get a better source later. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:05, June 15, 2019 (UTC) :: Ok. Then at least we should delete the description that it is defined by Rathjen. What do you think about it? :: p-adic 22:12, June 15, 2019 (UTC) ::: Sure. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 17:48, June 16, 2019 (UTC) :::: Thanks! :::: p-adic 22:49, June 16, 2019 (UTC) Grammer: iff In traditional mathematics, "iff" is used only when we explain equivalence. When we define a notion N by a property P, the we write "brah-brah is said to be N'' if P". The replacement of "if" here by "iff" is informal. (I know that it is correct in the usual grammer, though.) Which grammer should we obey? p-adic 10:15, June 25, 2019 (UTC) :Okay, in that case "if" can be used. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 10:19, June 25, 2019 (UTC) :: I see. Thank you. :: p-adic 11:23, June 25, 2019 (UTC) Thank you Thank you for stopping Derived Sugar. I appreciate if you deleted all the comments given by Derived Sugar. p-adic 22:09, July 10, 2019 (UTC) Thank you for editting them again. However, the comments containing discriminatory terms remains in the history pages. Could you delete them? p-adic 23:47, July 11, 2019 (UTC) Link from http to https As you wrote in your profile, wikia now changes http to https. This is stupid and I reported here. Now they say that my report was passed to their technical staff for investigation and review. �� Fish fish fish ... �� 17:34, July 21, 2019 (UTC) : It seems to have been fixed. �� Fish fish fish ... �� 16:52, August 5, 2019 (UTC) :: I tried Chrome and IE, but found that it had not been fixed. :: p-adic 20:54, August 5, 2019 (UTC) ::: It turned out that we may need to purge old pages. �� Fish fish fish ... �� 02:01, August 6, 2019 (UTC) :::: Oh, now I succeeded after purging. Thank you! :::: P-adic p-adic p-adic ... 02:03, August 6, 2019 (UTC) harassment Everyone is accusing me of harassing people on wiki & discord Pi.jayk (talk) 20:59, July 21, 2019 (UTC) Question Could you tell me how to delete a category from an article? The article of Rayo's number is categorised in "Computers", but it is irrelevant to computers. Therefore I would like to delete the categorisation. Thank you. p-adic 06:29, August 5, 2019 (UTC) :To delete a category, go to the source code of the article and remove the row that says "Category:(category name)". Or, you can go to the "categories" section of the setting and click the trash can icon. Rpakr (talk) 09:07, August 5, 2019 (UTC) ::By the way, I don't agree with removing Category:Computers from the Rayo's number article, because it's description states that it's about content related to computers and ''computability theory. Maybe create a separate category for stuff related to computability theory? -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 09:10, August 5, 2019 (UTC) :: @rpakr But I could not find "Category:(category name)" when I tried to edit the article. Also, I could not find "categories" section. :: @Cloudy176 Rayo's number has nothing to do with computability theory, because it is undefinable in hyperarithmetic. It is a large number in second order set theory. Why does it belong to the category? At least it is good to clarify what article should be added to the category numbers irrelevant to computability theory. :: p-adic 09:23, August 5, 2019 (UTC) ::: If you're using the classic editor, see the right of the edit screen, where you can find the Categories section. If you're using VisualEditor, click the "three-bar" button on the upper right and select "Categories". Click the category you want it removed, and click the trash can icon. ::: Also, now I think Category:Computers might not be the best fit for the article, but it is still notable that the number is defined using uncomputable functions. We already have Category:Uncomputable, but we don't have a separate navbox template for uncomputable functions/numbers, which is why I restored the template on the article. I think we should create a new navbox for uncomputable functions/numbers, or if it existed in the past but was redirected, restore it. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 01:10, August 6, 2019 (UTC) :::: Thank you. Then I think that it is better to separate "uncomputable function" section from "computable googolism" nav box. It should be a new nav box such as "uncomputable googolism", "uncomputable function", or something like that. If we need to distinguish set theoretic uncomputable functions such as Rayo's function from hyperarithmetical functions such as BB and oracle BB, then it might be good to embed the section into "set theory" nav box instead of creating a new nav box. :::: p-adic 01:54, August 6, 2019 (UTC) People Returning to the Wiki Long time no see! I am a Googologist 08:17, August 22, 2019 (UTC) :Hello! I was pretty busy, so I didn't have much time to work on this wiki; maybe I should do them soon. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:51, August 24, 2019 (UTC) Question on Categories Hi. Are we allowed to add blog posts to categories? Categories are portions of main spaces, but I do not know whether adding blog posts to categories means submitting original works to this wiki, which is prohibited. I heard someone (maybe Username) to say that we are not allowed, but I found that this blog post is added to categories. Thank you. p-adic 13:16, November 15, 2019 (UTC) : At least, we are supposed not to add personal pages to categories for googological notions, right? If so, could you add an explicit rule and disattach personal pages from those important categories? I know that your personal page is also added to many categories, but they seems not to be for googological notions, and hence it is not the case. : p-adic 03:09, November 30, 2019 (UTC) Question by Luckyluxius Why did you have to block Luckyluxiuz? He is my alt, and I have officially confirmed this on my alt, the person who asked to block me, my account, and lastly, yours. This garbage fire "elijah andy" who I assumed was "Edwin" started ranting about me. TBH I'd rather chug a gallon of Vicks VapoCool than get blocked from this wiki. This wiki is a masterpiece to me. Luckyluxius (talk) 06:53, November 29, 2019 (UTC) Changing Wikia policy Hey, Cloudy. We are interested in your opinion about this. Triakula (talk) 17:09, January 15, 2020 (UTC) Request on Speedy Deletion Hello. Could you please delete this picture? As I wrote in the "reason", Japanese government requires people not to upload such a picture or at least to be careful for others not to be able to print it. Seriously, I could not understand why such a picture is allowed to stay here. p-adic 06:16, January 23, 2020 (UTC) Croutonillion Hello, Cloudy. Shall we restore the original croutonillion? Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ ) 10:31, January 30, 2020 (UTC) :The original croutonillion was deleted by Vel! because he didn't want the page to be kept. I the entire history of the page before it was deleted, and I have been thinking about created a new "archive" wiki and import the page there, safe from deletion. :But if you want to restore the page on its original place, go for it. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 17:07, January 30, 2020 (UTC) ::Thanks, I restored it. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ ) 17:34, January 30, 2020 (UTC) Mango523WNR (talk) 11:19, February 5, 2020 (UTC) What do you think of this? https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User_blog:Mango523WNR/New_Numbers_in_Today(1) Mango523WNR (talk) 09:14, February 6, 2020 (UTC) How do you rate my profile? https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User:Mango523WNR Mango523WNR (talk) 15:06, February 6, 2020 (UTC) https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User_blog:Mango523WNR/My_profile_has_been_Updated Mango523WNR (talk) 00:03, February 10, 2020 (UTC) https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User_blog:Mango523WNR/GMT_23:4x_2020/2/9 Mango523WNR (talk) 12:23, February 10, 2020 (UTC) Hello, I am Mango523WNR, I created a list about Numbers Classes, I will make all of Class 0-23 Numbers Lists. Would you like to add Class 21, 22, 23? https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User:Mango523WNR/p27 Reverting I'm sorry for reverting your actions again, but I don't know what to do for now. Could you please talk with P進大好きbot and reach a consensus about all these images? I'm a bit tired of this edit-warring. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ ) 12:32, February 18, 2020 (UTC)